Dear guys,

I have a situation which needs your points of view. I am solving an oil transition problem which is:

"Carry down appears mostly in my league competition. I usually us a solid coverstock bowling ball (my Storm Optimus Solid) to solve the carry down. It works but sometimes it can not hold the mid lane if the mid lane is getting tight or begins to dry out. If it can pass the mid lane perfectly, carry down is just a breeze. Even on a short 35 feet oil pattern - 23.6ml total volume, carry down damage my score a lot and it makes me miss the pocket many times."

So I am thinking of a hybrid coverstock bowling ball which is Storm Lock hybrid. I have learnt that Hybrid coverstock can help the ball pass the mid lane and retain enery especially when the mid lane is gettting tighter (or dry) and still give us strong back end to deal with the carry down oil down lane.

Am i right? Correct me if you think i am wrong please.

P/S: my arsenal: Optimus Solid, Optimus Pearl, Ebonite Cyclone, Motiv Sniper.

Thank you very much!

Consider thinking of the whole lane as 3 separate parts. Heads, mid-lane and back-ends. For each bowler, based on style and abilities, each of the 3 areas will have a length and width that the bowler must match up their skid, hook and roll phases to.

Carry-down simply elongates the hook phase length and shortens the roll phase length. The result are shots that may recover but recover too late.

Going to a more aggressive cover stock may get a ball to recover better but the ball is still going to recover too late. Unless a bowler has lots of rev's, they'll hit the pocket but leave lot's of soft 10's.

I'd recommend drilling their ball different. I'd drill their ball to skid less and transition to hook sooner to shorten the hook phase length giving the ball more time to roll before contact with the pins.

Here's a personal example. I have 2 Storm 'Locks'. One is drilled 50 x 5 x 50 and one is drilled 45 x 4 x 35.

The first ball works fine on a wet dry pattern in early games but slowly as lanes change, the hook phase gets longer and the ball begins to recover too late. I'm still hitting the pocket, I'm just not carrying those hits. By switching to the other ball, the hook phase gets shortened and the ball finishes earlier eliminating all the week 10's.

Both balls have the same cover and cores. It's the drilling that corrects the problem, not the surface. The idea is too get more of the ball in contact with the lane on each subsequent flare circle.

I'm not saying a more aggressive surface won't work, but if the ball is drilled the same as a ball that won't finish soon enough, the bowler will still be face with a drilling that wants to finish too late. Ball surface can make a ball break harder, but if the ball is already too far down lane, the entry angle will be too wide and the result will be less than desired.

Great idea! buddy. I have to say it's logical! It's been a long time i receive a great lesson like this. Thanks a lot! I like the idea of drilling the same bowling ball with different layout.

One more question, what is your benchmark bowling ball?

I'm not sure what you mean by benchmark ball. Like many bowlers, I own a bunch. I have a 4 ball arsenal that I put together for the lane condition I expect and carry a 5th that I don't bring in just in case.

Where I bowl we have a Jekyll and Hyde reaction. We shoot 4 games in a 22 team league. Lanes 1-12 hook pretty good but 13-22 don't. It's the same oil pattern but the lane surfaces came from another house and 1-12 came from an area in the other house that was used more.

A ball that will strike in game one on the left end will leave a
2-8-10 on the right end. So, my arsenal changes with the pair of lanes I'm bowling on.

I can't say that a person could buy 3 identical balls and just drill them different and that's it. It's not that easy. Where I bowl, the carry-down appears in game 2 and may last for 15 frames, but eventually the lanes will break down forcing bowlers to move left with their feet or to choose a ball with less surface.

How far left a person can move is dependent on style and the amount of hand they get into their shots. I'm 69 and can't step around the ball return anymore, so I'm limited to shooting 13-17 at the arrows. That far left aggressive balls will flare-out, so I keep my rev's up by going to a less aggressive drilling as well as a less aggressive ball surface. I also will switch from an asymmetric ball to a symmetric ball to elongate my hook phase.

I try to control my entry angle. I think too many bowlers become obsessed with a big hook. As a person ages, speed drops, RPM's drop, axis rotation drops and a person has to become smarter not stronger.

My latest endeavor is to unhinge my wrist at the bottom to increase RPM's with less effort. My new hero is a woman, 'New Hui Fen' from Singapore. Nobody gets more on the ball with less effort than her.

Mo Pinel has a video out where he talks about a ball by Radical called 'Fix'. I'm not sure I buy the hype around the ball, but his discussion about ball reaction phases and controlling the lengths of those phases really got my attention. Here's a link;

https://www.facebook.com/radical.bowling.technologies/videos/1075633965890108/

I'm a little surprised about this since you are very knowledgeable. Someone else posted this article in a different thread, it's the best definition I found online.

http://tamerbowling.com/what-is-your-benchmark-ball/

Mark

Where about in Vietnam are you located? I spent some time there in 1969 from Cua Viet in the north to the Cau Mau in the south and all the way around into the Gulf of Siam and the Island of An Thoi.

By the definitions in your link, I guess I don't have a 'benchmark ball'. All my balls have the same 'fit' but they all have different 'Perfect Scale' and 'dual angle' values.

I don't use a 'benchmark ball' to read the lanes. Of the 3 I bring in with me, I will throw the one I know is the most aggressive. It may not be the same ball week-to-week.

If I'm bowling on lanes 1-2 which are always hooking, a 900 Global 'Black Ops' may be the first ball I try, but if it hooks too much, I'll go right to a 'Cyclone'. If I'm on 9-10, my first ball may be a 'Lock' drilled 50 x 5 x 50. If I'm on 21-22, I may use a 'Lock' drilled 45 x 4 x 35. I let the lanes tell me what ball I can use, not the other way around.

Over time, I learn which balls to bring in based on the pair I'm bowling on. The one ball I own that feels the best all the time is the oldest ball I carry. It's an old Columbia 'Blue Dot'. The fit of all my equipment is based on the fit of that 'Blue Dot'. I guess I'm more of an experimenter than a technician.

Bowlers have a lot of interesting theories. Some of them even sound scientific. I often tell them do whatever works for you. The confidence it gives you might be enough to make a difference.

But, in reality, do minor layout variations make any practical difference in ball motion? USBC and other studies suggests that it does not. More importantly, other factors like small surface adjustments, far outweigh any layout changes.

Below is a recent article published in Bowling This Month, that takes the USBC study a step further.
https://www.bowlingthismonth.com/bowling...ng-ball-motion/

I've been keeping up with the articles on BTM. Pretty interesting.
Just like I noticed myself recently, maintaining your ball is quite important. Keeping your ball from getting oil logged or getting that oil out of the ball can go a long way to having good reaction. Being able to recognize more quickly what may be happening to your reaction and why can help you make changes to improve your scores...

I agree that ball surface or lane surface creates the most ball reaction. The USBC's BMS demonstrates that if you're willing to accept their findings based on the limitations they applied to their study.

Assuming USBC has got it right, would it not also make sense that drilling a ball to get as much of the ball in contact with the lane on each revolution will maximize it's potential reaction? This is a classic min/max problem. The bowler must find that place where they get maximum friction but scrub off minimum revolutions in the process. I don't remember reading where USBC attempted to find that balance.

Can the same ball drilled 2 different ways have 2 different reactions, despite ball surface and lane surface? If a difference does occur, What caused it?

Even after watching Mo Pinel's video for the 'FIX' I discount ball numbers as major factors in the reaction of balls I buy. On the other hand, I definitely buy into the idea that we can change the length of each phase by drilling a ball to control where transitions start based on the oil pattern.

According to Pinel, the 'FIX' can shorten the hook phase by simply going Pin up or Pin down. Drilling it symmetric or asymmetric. They seem to have some numbers that prove their theory. Why would they stake their theory and company reputation on B.S.?